I have to agree. Even if one doesn't agree with their message, that group gets a lot of flak for no reason. I've been watching videos of Behe, Meyer, Dembski, etc. recently and practically every comment section is filled to the brim with personal insults.

One area I'd like to see Skeptiko get into is the connection between world leadership and UFOs and Psi phenomenon. Just consider the 2011 GCF conference (Global Competitiveness Forum), which included talks from Jacques Vallee, Nick Pope and Stanton Friedman. Former President Bill Clinton spoke at the same conference. A more recent forum called the ICLIF Leadership Energy Summit featured talks by Dean Radin and Bill Bengston.

Alex raised the question as to what direction Skeptiko should go. Michael usually picks up those questions and reminds us of the question we should try to answer - so let's try to answer this one - the biggest of them all!

I tend to feel that Skeptiko is doing awfully well as it is - so I wouldn't want to see a big change of emphasis, but here are a few thoughts.

It would be nice to hear from some 'thinking skeptics' - by which I mean, people who actually see something of what Skeptiko is about - perhaps the fundamental problems of consciousness - so the discussion won't just be brain dead! Maybe they should be really well primed ahead of time about the issues to be raised - e.g. NDE's - so they really can't just claim not to have read the relevant research in the interview!

I wonder if there are doctors or nurses who encounter dying people often, who could contribute something useful. Possibly someone recently retired, so they won't need to look over their shoulders to their managers.

I also think Skeptiko could cover the whole question of hallucinogenic drugs in more detail. These absolutely must be relevant to the nature of consciousness.

I am a bit cautious about K9's idea about including more UFO material, not because I don't think it is relevant, but because it introduces a whole different set of interests that maybe don't excite people so much here (or is that just me?) Maybe we should think instead of adopting a few 'sister podcasts' which we think cover the subject of UFO's in a sensible manner. We could promote each other's shows so people could mix and match as they saw fit without diluting our core material.

I guess I feel the same about assorted conspiracies, global warming, crop circles etc. Let's not make these subjects taboo by any means, but lets cover them with links to other podcasts that do these subjects well.

Alex, I feel you have a real grip on the core subject matter (which obviously gets you noticed!), and it may be best not to take on peripheral issues too much.

I would like there to be more interviews on UFO and alien phenomenon and the connections to consciousness studies and afterlife phenomena. But it might be hard to find serious investigators to interview.

This is not exactly Skeptiko 3.0 but it is an idea. The idea is that you could start a Skeptiko "Channel B". The purpose of this new podcast would be to host much (possibly much, much) longer interviews with guests and, perhaps, to document some other activities. Let me explain.

-To me, reading the books of certain guests (Ian Rubenstein, Gary Schwartz, Andy Paquette and especially Nick Bunick) has greatly deepened and changed my understanding. So longer interviews would offer this to people in an easier way than buying books. Also, these interviews could be more aggressive. Really digging into critical points in an investigative journalism sort of way (while still remaining friendly - we don’t want to scare off the guests either).

-Other activities. For example, Nick Bunick (http://www.skeptiko.com/122-reincarnation-of-apostle-paul-nick-bunick-scrutinized/). In his book he mentions multiple people who witnessed this and that. So, you could check Nick Bunick’s facts. You can get all of these people (or at least some) and ask them to tell the story again. In a similar vein you could get Rey Hernandez’s wife on. This is not to be rude and doubt his integrity but is rather to take this thing and "nail it to the floor” so that it is fully documented in a public forum. For guests who are telling the truth, this is in their interest (and I believe the vast majority of the guests are telling the truth).

Science advances on the edge cases. Stuff that doesn’t fit. In this paranormal field, the edge cases are often personal stories but many have witnesses. Call the witnesses to the stand. We can’t, of course, force them to the stand but I think many will come anyway.

I think the key thing is this. All the Dean Radin and Rupert Sheldrake stuff if great. Trying to be scientific is great. It builds credibility. But, to me, the most interesting stuff is this personal stuff. It is much harder to progress but it is not impossible.

The “scientific evidence” paradigm is the "gold standard" but it is not always practical for all this stuff. So, let’s move on to the “silver standard” of the “legal” paradigm. Call all the witnesses and “cross examine” them.

(and, of course, this is only part of “channel B” - "channel B" is also just more in depth conversations).

One more thing, “channel B” would be free of the constraints of channel A. So, for example, interviews can be 3 hours long or 10 minutes long. There can be one, two, three interviews with the same person. Interviews come out whenever they are ready (not to any schedule). There are different hosts depending on who is interested and available (so it is crowdsourced Skeptiko). Shows can also have a laser focus on very specific points. It would be nice if standards of production (audio quality and transscripts) can be maintained but if they slip then that is OK too.

Alex, my first thought for Skeptiko 3.0 is the Big Questions. What does the data tell us about those big questions? What does the data tell us about God, for example. You could do multiple shows on that--what does the NDE data tell us? What does the psychedelic data tell us? What does the religious experience data tell us? Etc. Other big subjects include: nature of consciousness, life after death, reincarnation, why we are here, free will, ETs, etc. I'm really not sure this is a good fit for Skeptiko. It's just the sort of thing I'd personally like to listen to.

Echoing Robert Perry's post, the things which most interest me are those which are only reached after we stop trying to find absolute proof or certainty. As some sceptics have demonstrated, for some people there will never be enough proof. But what territory do we find ourselves in when we look over that horizon and begin to explore the vast territory beyond? One example would include interviews with the deceased which are regularly published by various different sources, but tend to be disregarded by the majority here.

I don't disagree that they are all connected, but my point is that there are almost certainly other podcasts out there that deal with UFO's in a suitable way. Alex has built up a lot of expertise in the core issues of Skeptiko, and I don't want the podcasts spread too thinly.

One area I'd like to see Skeptiko get into is the connection between world leadership and UFOs and Psi phenomenon. Just consider the 2011 GCF conference (Global Competitiveness Forum), which included talks from Jacques Vallee, Nick Pope and Stanton Friedman. Former President Bill Clinton spoke at the same conference. A more recent forum called the ICLIF Leadership Energy Summit featured talks by Dean Radin and Bill Bengston.

It would be nice to hear from some 'thinking skeptics' - by which I mean, people who actually see something of what Skeptiko is about - perhaps the fundamental problems of consciousness - so the discussion won't just be brain dead! Maybe they should be really well primed ahead of time about the issues to be raised - e.g. NDE's - so they really can't just claim not to have read the relevant research in the interview!

I would like there to be more interviews on UFO and alien phenomenon and the connections to consciousness studies and afterlife phenomena. But it might be hard to find serious investigators to interview.